Wal-Mart Droid Factory Sets

[ruiner]

Yeah, it feels good not having to track down **** like this.

Glad I got out when I did...I really don't miss it.

I'm actually enjoying my new line of interest - one figure a month, shipped to my door.

[Dressel Rebel]

For $17 + tax each, I'm not buying any of these.  The figures are not that good, and for that price I don't care if the build-a-droid can walk, talk, and draw me a bath.

Pass.

[GrandMoffNick]

Is it just me who gets the impression that there are a lot of people collecting SW toys who don't actually enjoy it? And I do recognize the difference between being pissed about price increases and not enjoying collecting.

I love it, which is why I do it.

[CHEWIE]

Wal-Mart tells Hasbro what they'll pay, not the other way around. My wife's father knows this for fact.

Sure, a retailer has to agree to a price - that's the way a vendor relationship works.  What I am saying, is I doubt that Hasbro is passing these off to Wal-Mart at basically the same price as last year.  I think you're saying the same thing though.

So, let's look at last year as an example.  Let's assume that the sets Wal-Mart sold for $9.96 were being purchased from Hasbro for $6.00 each, roughly a markup of 66%, which gives them a decent GP of 39.76%.

Now, let's assume that Wal-Mart needs to make that SAME GP (or better) this year.  Let's assume they want it to be a flat 40% GP.  If they are selling the sets for $17.00 each, then they are paying $10.20 for each one they order.

That comes to a MARKUP from Hasbro of 66.67% they are passing to Wal-Mart.  Does Hasbro really need to raise the price up that much?  I think that's insane.

Granted, these numbers are based on assumptions, but if the price increases to the retailer, they have to pass it along to the consumer.  Wal-Mart had to agree to the price of course, but I don't blame the retailer for marking something up to keep up with what the supplier is doing.


*DISCLAIMER - My math is correct, I think.  But I could be making a mistake... multi-tasking while at work.    

[P-Siddy]

Nick, I think most people love it, it's just that Hasbro has ruined it for some. I just collect the carded figures for the most part, and some Battlepacks (which used to be a good deal). But if the prices for repacked vehicles were $20-35 are now $70 is a few years time, it's like becoming one of the sisterhood in Shawshank Redemption. SW figures are now at the $8-9 range, where similar GI Joes, which come with more accessories are cheaper. Plus, we get 'accidental' variants or running changes to make carded collectors have to buy another Breha Organa.   I just think that it weighs heavy on people after awhile.

[GrandMoffNick]

Maybe I should have made my observation in a different thread, but it's not so much the people mad about pricing, because I'm on board there. I just hear a lot of "why are they making this stupid thing?", "I can't believe I HAVE to buy this", and I'm sure I've done it too. Not sure what my point is to be honest.

[JACKOFTRADZE]

Is it just me who gets the impression that there are a lot of people collecting SW toys who don't actually enjoy it? And I do recognize the difference between being pissed about price increases and not enjoying collecting.

I love it, which is why I do it.

I do love SW Collecting and have always supported the mainline 100%, I never left and been with it since 95'! I have never balked at price but recently I have been finding myself questioning what's really going to compliment my collection or what would just sit in my vehicle/figure bins. My collection is so large & robust I finally hit a point that vehicle redocs do not do it for me as much. The ARC is pure insanity. I passed on the Wampa Arc because of price, underwhelming deco and so sick of the prequel crap. I really dug the Imperial ARC, I was planning on buying it but there is no way in hell that I am forking over $80. Even the CW Y-Wing, which I was planning on getting, I am really doubting I will buy now due to the price/value.

When it comes to figures, I have always phased out older sculpts either liquidating them, trading them or used them for custom fodder to sell, so it was never a big deal to me having to buy the occasional unwanted figure to get something new. These new DF sets I will still get but I will be cutting down on how much I was planning on buying due to price/figures included. If the figure choices were great I would not have balked at the price as I would have been able to justify it to myself. The figure selections are so bad overall it makes the price a big issue for me now.

Compared to last years the figures/price made these an amazing value and a wonderful compliment to my collection. This kind of offering (The new DF sets/ARC) takes away from the joy of collecting because they are making it harder to justify and not giving a good enough incentive to collect these particular SKU's. I think that's what everyone's trying to express.

If they did not enjoy it I do not think they would take the time to gripe.

[Darth_Anton]

Wal-Mart tells Hasbro what they'll pay, not the other way around. My wife's father knows this for fact.

Sure, a retailer has to agree to a price - that's the way a vendor relationship works.  What I am saying, is I doubt that Hasbro is passing these off to Wal-Mart at basically the same price as last year.  I think you're saying the same thing though.

So, let's look at last year as an example.  Let's assume that the sets Wal-Mart sold for $9.96 were being purchased from Hasbro for $6.00 each, roughly a markup of 66%, which gives them a decent GP of 39.76%.

Now, let's assume that Wal-Mart needs to make that SAME GP (or better) this year.  Let's assume they want it to be a flat 40% GP.  If they are selling the sets for $17.00 each, then they are paying $10.20 for each one they order.

That comes to a MARKUP from Hasbro of 66.67% they are passing to Wal-Mart.  Does Hasbro really need to raise the price up that much?  I think that's insane.

Granted, these numbers are based on assumptions, but if the price increases to the retailer, they have to pass it along to the consumer.  Wal-Mart had to agree to the price of course, but I don't blame the retailer for marking something up to keep up with what the supplier is doing.


*DISCLAIMER - My math is correct, I think.  But I could be making a mistake... multi-tasking while at work.    

No. We're no saying the same thing. What I'm saying is that Wal-Mart goes to Hasbro and says - we'll buy your product for $X and if you don't like it, we won't buy it and you'll loose half of your profit because we're the top retailer. Assuming inflation, it only cost Hasbro about a penny more per unit to make these over last year and I guarantee that Hasbro is not charging 70% more for these. This is WM price gouging, not Hasbro.

[Ben]

$17? Pass. I wanted the Darktrooper, but I will not buy that many substandard figures for it, especially at that price.

[ruiner]

Wal-Mart tells Hasbro what they'll pay, not the other way around. My wife's father knows this for fact.

Sure, a retailer has to agree to a price - that's the way a vendor relationship works.  What I am saying, is I doubt that Hasbro is passing these off to Wal-Mart at basically the same price as last year.  I think you're saying the same thing though.

So, let's look at last year as an example.  Let's assume that the sets Wal-Mart sold for $9.96 were being purchased from Hasbro for $6.00 each, roughly a markup of 66%, which gives them a decent GP of 39.76%.

Now, let's assume that Wal-Mart needs to make that SAME GP (or better) this year.  Let's assume they want it to be a flat 40% GP.  If they are selling the sets for $17.00 each, then they are paying $10.20 for each one they order.

That comes to a MARKUP from Hasbro of 66.67% they are passing to Wal-Mart.  Does Hasbro really need to raise the price up that much?  I think that's insane.

Granted, these numbers are based on assumptions, but if the price increases to the retailer, they have to pass it along to the consumer.  Wal-Mart had to agree to the price of course, but I don't blame the retailer for marking something up to keep up with what the supplier is doing.


*DISCLAIMER - My math is correct, I think.  But I could be making a mistake... multi-tasking while at work.    

No. We're no saying the same thing. What I'm saying is that Wal-Mart goes to Hasbro and says - we'll buy your product for $X and if you don't like it, we won't buy it and you'll loose half of your profit because we're the top retailer. Assuming inflation, it only cost Hasbro about a penny more per unit to make these over last year and I guarantee that Hasbro is not charging 70% more for these. This is WM price gouging, not Hasbro.

No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about.

[CorranHorn]

Is it just me who gets the impression that there are a lot of people collecting SW toys who don't actually enjoy it? And I do recognize the difference between being pissed about price increases and not enjoying collecting.

I love it, which is why I do it.

we hear this sort of thing mostly from completists and carded collectors. it's an OCD thing I think, I used to have a desire to have every single figure made but I've gotten away from that as it's grown absurd over the past 5 years or so. but a desire is a bit different from a need, where we often hear carded collectors (sorry guys, not intending to pick on you but many of you are the best example out there) saying that they need to get such and such figure even though they hate it. it amazes me to hear this nowadays, with so much crap out there does anyone really NEED more crap?

[GrandMoffNick]

This might not mean anything to anyone, but I found that as soon as I was able to look at my collection as "What SW toys I have" as opposed to "What SW toys I don't have", it made it a lot easier to say I don't want this toy and I'm going to leave it.

P.S. I'd like to apologize for how often I get threads off track.

[David]

WOW. $17 (plus CA tax, which is crazy). That's just disgusting. I think I'll wait for these to show up at TJ Maxx in 2011.

[CHEWIE]

Wal-Mart tells Hasbro what they'll pay, not the other way around. My wife's father knows this for fact.

Sure, a retailer has to agree to a price - that's the way a vendor relationship works.  What I am saying, is I doubt that Hasbro is passing these off to Wal-Mart at basically the same price as last year.  I think you're saying the same thing though.

So, let's look at last year as an example.  Let's assume that the sets Wal-Mart sold for $9.96 were being purchased from Hasbro for $6.00 each, roughly a markup of 66%, which gives them a decent GP of 39.76%.

Now, let's assume that Wal-Mart needs to make that SAME GP (or better) this year.  Let's assume they want it to be a flat 40% GP.  If they are selling the sets for $17.00 each, then they are paying $10.20 for each one they order.

That comes to a MARKUP from Hasbro of 66.67% they are passing to Wal-Mart.  Does Hasbro really need to raise the price up that much?  I think that's insane.

Granted, these numbers are based on assumptions, but if the price increases to the retailer, they have to pass it along to the consumer.  Wal-Mart had to agree to the price of course, but I don't blame the retailer for marking something up to keep up with what the supplier is doing.


*DISCLAIMER - My math is correct, I think.  But I could be making a mistake... multi-tasking while at work.    

No. We're no saying the same thing. What I'm saying is that Wal-Mart goes to Hasbro and says - we'll buy your product for $X and if you don't like it, we won't buy it and you'll loose half of your profit because we're the top retailer. Assuming inflation, it only cost Hasbro about a penny more per unit to make these over last year and I guarantee that Hasbro is not charging 70% more for these. This is WM price gouging, not Hasbro.

No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about.

Agreed 100%.

Anton, I think your logic is very flawed my friend.  If it were true, then Wal-Mart would say "We're only going to pay $2.00 for each one, so we can sell them for $2.97 each."

Look at it this way... Hasbro is doing essentially the same thing with the Target 2-pks - the price is a few bucks cheaper, but that's most likely because there isn't a big Dark Trooper part included with each one... unless of course you're saying that Target goes to Hasbro and says "We'll buy your product for $X and if you don't like it, we won't buy it and you'll lose half of your profit because we're the SECOND top retailer."

[JACKOFTRADZE]

Guys, I hate to burst a few bubbles but Darth Anton is somewhat correct. I have direct experience with Wal-Mart and have 9 years direct experience in the Toy industry. Despite my distaste for the price of these sets (as I voiced earlier) my true disappointment is more so in the figure selection that does not justify the price. Figure selection is 100% on Hasbro. I can sympathize with them to an extent on the pricing issue. Quick summary to hopefully shed some light on the the reality of how they panned out on the price that we are bitching about:

The design team will get an exact factory costing of the proposed product that they want to make once the design is finalized to be sure they can actually deliver it. They will work with marketing to set it to a target price they think they can sell it for with many other factors taken into consideration. Some factors include basing the concept price on comparable offerings & the production run to make it profitable for the company to manufacture. Otherwise it's not worth doing if they cannot sell enough to make money on the investment of R&D. Hasbro Sales/Marketing will then work with retailers directly to get product placement on the stuff the company agreed to proceed with. Once they meet with the retailer and present the product the retailer does have a lot of say in the matter. For this particular instance, Hasbro stated that this WILL be produced less than last year. That has a profound affect on the price and I am 99.9% positive that is exactly what screwed the price for this SKU. Hasbro most likely went in there with the intention to retail these for $14.99. I say that because it's comparable to the current comic pack price but comes with a droid part and is exclusive.

With that said, WM most likely did not want to sign up for the quantity that Hasbro was proposing (due to the fact that they got stuck a bit last year). WM wanted to sign up for "X" amount but that number did not make the tooling/development investment time worth doing for Hasbro at a $14.99 price. WM would say they would not take it otherwise. In order to salvage the SKU, both companies agreed to the current higher retail price to make it profitable for both of them and get the product out there, both believing they will still sell at $17 a pop.

Was it better not to do these at all? Maybe, but Hasbro wanted the money & release some figures that we may never get otherwise. If these do not sell they will know that the market will not bear the price. afterwards they will reevaluate it to see what went wrong to avoid making the mistake again. That's up to you the consumer to decide. You have the power to say no.

Does that make sense to everyone? So it's a little of both that's responsible for the price, the retailer and manufacturer. The ARC fighter on the other hand is another story and deserves to die a dusty death on the shelf.